Anyone else think Werewyrm got a bit screwed here?

2»

Comments

  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,566 ★★★★★

    AKKKTEK said:

    DrZola said:

    It’s a shame. And no one could have seen this type of thing coming.

    Dr. Zola

    Kabam purposely used an older version of the game for whatever reasons. They should have checked the bugs that were present then and tried to fix it
    This isn't quite right. When a Server Side fix is made, it has to be made to every server individually, and unfortunately, this one was missed. We didn't purposely use an older version of the game.

    I do feel really bad for Werewrym on this one. He chose a great counter for P2099, but lost due to a bug.
    Still not fair 👎! Your bug made him lose.This gave unfair advantage to opponent.
    They understand that it's unfair, but there really is no solution at this point that isn't unfair to the other participants.
    Sorry dude, but “not fair to that guy? Tough. He’s out. Gotta be fair to those guys, so this guy gets a raw deal”, that’s not it chief.
    That's not what I said at all. If you're nullifying everyone else's efforts after the fact, that's equally as unfair. It sucks, no doubt. I feel for him. You still have to take into account the competition as a whole.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,566 ★★★★★
    Do you expect them to redo the entire Round after Winners have been crowned?
  • Markjv81Markjv81 Member Posts: 1,030 ★★★★
    Happy shouldn’t have even won the second match against I’m Bleh, potentially shouldn’t have even been in the final.
  • AverageDesiAverageDesi Member Posts: 5,260 ★★★★★
    H3t3r said:

    Werewrym said:

    Look, the kid lost a video game contest. No lives were lost. Don't act like this is the end of the world.

    On the one hand, I agree with you. It really is just a game and sometimes stuff happens. On the other hand, this is the most competitive thing in the game and we all are here becuase we take this game seriously, so its a shame that a bug interfered with my possible chances of winning. Kabam was super nice to me about the whole thing and gave me compensation for it, so I'm not mad, or upset, just disappointed.

    I will probably do a write up later about my experience with the summoner showdown (which on the whole was a positive one).
    What was the compensation if I may ask?
    NDA probably?
  • AverageDesiAverageDesi Member Posts: 5,260 ★★★★★


    Is it only me who's confused with this?

    This happened during the Asia's too. Just one match so many didn't notice
  • Hilbert_unbeatable2Hilbert_unbeatable2 Member Posts: 805 ★★★


    Is it only me who's confused with this?

    This happened during the Asia's too. Just one match so many didn't notice
    Yes very hurtful tbh
  • DrDrillDrDrill Member Posts: 163 ★★★
    lol, did they deleted werewyrm's post?
  • BitterSteelBitterSteel Member Posts: 9,264 ★★★★★
    DrDrill said:

    lol, did they deleted werewyrm's post?

    It’s 6 posts below this thread :D
  • kubricknolankubricknolan Member Posts: 99
    @Kabam Miike This scoring is better be fixed in the new 1v1 mode. it just doesn't make sense. The fighting time only should come into play if both players defeated the opponent or took down same percentage of health.

  • Jeal79Jeal79 Member Posts: 444 ★★★
    Just on the scoring system, I think I know a solution. Hear me out...

    There's a slight problem even using fight time as a tie break. It's geared to score higher the shorter the fight (assumedly an oversight which automatically assumed the attacker would win). Now even if this were a tie-breaker it would still seem unfair. Both challengers do equal damage to the defender but the guy who dies fastest wins via tie-break? That still doesn't sound right... So here's the proposition...

    There's 3 score measures:
    - Att health
    - Def Health
    - Time
    There's 3 fight outcomes:
    - Attacker KO
    - Defender KO
    - Timeout

    These tie up nicely so that whatever the outcome, you can be scored on 2 factors. If you timeout, you score on both health bars, if you win you score on own health & time, if you lose you score on Def health & time...

    Here's the bit they got wrong... If you win, speed of victory should be a point scoring bonus. If you lose then speed of defeat should be a PENALTY DEDUCTION.

    So here's how those 3 outcomes would be scored:

    1) ATTACKER KO:
    (null measure) = Att health remaining
    Points awarded for Def health lost
    Points deducted for speed of defeat

    2) DEFENDER KO:
    (null measure) = Def Health remaining
    Points awarded for Att health remaining
    Points awarded for speed of victory

    3) TIMEOUT
    (null measure) = Speed of fight
    Points awarded for Att health remaining
    Points awarded for Def health lost

    I feel this could work and the main problem witnessed with using the clock as a scoring mechanism was that it hadn't been thought out what the consequence would be if the Attacker died. All it needed to be in this instance was a penalty and not a bonus.
  • SearmenisSearmenis Member Posts: 1,623 ★★★★★
    Was my post against forum rules somehow and got DELETED?


  • This content has been removed.
  • SeraphionSeraphion Member Posts: 1,496 ★★★★


    Is it only me who's confused with this?

    This is such a joke. With big fails like this kabam really looks my amateurs with the whole PvP.

    And don't even start with the nodes.
  • KarmaConnectKarmaConnect Member Posts: 48
    edited October 2021
    @Kabam Miike Fight Duration should only be considered when an attacker beats the defender 100% as an aditional bonus score. If they didnt beat the defender, it should be 0.
Sign In or Register to comment.